NFL is behind the times with OT rules

[BabyChark23]

I feel like half the folks here are bringing arguments, and actual statistics, and the other half are just saying "that's football", "stop complaining", and "should have won it in regulation time", thereby completely disregarding the actual arguments being made for why many of us feel that adding the luck of a coin flip to a measurement of skill is ridiculous.

Can anybody that is in favor of the current rules actually bring a counter argument to the fact that you are handing one team a statistical advantage via said coin flip (and I'd assume that the 20% mentioned is a lot higher if both teams are built around their offense as was the case last night)? Do we really doubt the game would have ended the same had the Bills gotten their shot at offense first by the luck of a flip?

I had no skin in the game last night, just trying to see an argument that actually speaks for the current system. Because "shouldn't have let it get to that point" really isn't one.


((Also, since one previous poster mentioned soccer and that glorious OT game... UEFA/FIFA tried sudden death as well, at the Euros 1996. The finals were decided by the most ridiculous of dumb luck goals (and I say that as a German, who's team won becauseof said goal), and the result was hated so, so much by all fans that the idea was immediately scratched and replaced by the previous system. I wish that would happen here as well.))

Alright, so the Playoff OT numbers since the NFL altered the OT rules in 2010, to first team scores a TD wins, FG results in kickoff so the other team gets the ball.

The team first to receive the ball in OT is 10-1, however, only 7 out of 11 have won on the first possession. So yes, it's currently favoring the team that gets the ball first. Prior to the Bills failure, it was 6 out of 10. Not hugely in favor of the team getting the ball first.

Fun fact, Tim Tebow was the first QB to throw a TD to win a playoff game in OT under the new rules.

Thanks for the numbers. So 7 of 11 then. That's a 63% win rate without one of the teams ever even getting the ball, and a 10-1 W/L ratio overall for the coin flip winner. Those numbers seem to indicate that the luck of the flip definitely influences the outcome more than it should. At least to me.

True. But if you think back to your statistics courses, the small sample size becomes a factor. If you flip a coin 11 times it might come up heads 7 of those times. That doesn’t mean there is a 64% chance of it landing on heads when you flip a coin. The sample size is too small to tell you anything meaningful. If the sample is larger (say 163 times), it might come up heads only 86 times, 52%. At that point, you can feel more confident that you have an accurate result.

[Pac_Eddy]

True. But if you think back to your statistics courses, the small sample size becomes a factor. If you flip a coin 11 times it might come up heads 7 of those times. That doesn’t mean there is a 64% chance of it landing on heads when you flip a coin. The sample size is too small to tell you anything meaningful. If the sample is larger (say 163 times), it might come up heads only 86 times, 52%. At that point, you can feel more confident that you have an accurate result.

Agree with this. We need far more samples to know if this is a reliable number. It would take decades to get to that point seeing as we only have a sample size of 11 in the first decade of the rule.

Had the Packer-49ers gone to OT and continued to be a defensive struggle, the coin flip winner wouldn't be such a hot topic today. I still think you don't have a lot to complain about if you allow your opponent to drive the field for a TD on the first possession of OT. Defense is part of the game.

Edit: after reading that OT article, interesting to note than in this 10 year span including ALL OT games (not just playoffs), the winner of the coin flip won the game 86 out of 163 games, with 10 ending in a tie, for a win rate of 53%.

[qazxswedcvfrtgbnhyuj]

I'll give you the small sample size of course.

The playoff vs non playoff OT is an entirely different can of worms though imo, as the teams making it that far in the current NFL are far more frequently offensive powerhouses than teams that have gotten there for their strong defense. Meaning it would make sense why playoff OTs would be more frequently decided on the first drive. Nobody's scared of the 2021 Jaguars getting the ball first in OT.

I guess my point remains though, that even if it were only a small advantage to the winner of the coin flip (debatable), why not take an approach that eliminates any advantage given by luck? Like say the college one?

In other words, I don't understand how anybody could be watching that amazing game and then coming to the conclusion that this predictable OT ending was the perfect way do determine the victor.

[qazxswedcvfrtgbnhyuj]

And again, the "you don't deserve to win if you can't stop an offense" argument doesn't make sense to me, as then neither team deserved it. The Chiefs D was just as bad as the Bills, they just didn't happen to be on the field last (but they tried just as hard to lose as well)

[BabyChark23]

I'll give you the small sample size of course.

The playoff vs non playoff OT is an entirely different can of worms though imo, as the teams making it that far in the current NFL are far more frequently offensive powerhouses than teams that have gotten there for their strong defense. Meaning it would make sense why playoff OTs would be more frequently decided on the first drive. Nobody's scared of the 2021 Jaguars getting the ball first in OT.

I guess my point remains though, that even if it were only a small advantage to the winner of the coin flip (debatable), why not take an approach that eliminates any advantage given by luck? Like say the college one?

In other words, I don't understand how anybody could be watching that amazing game and then coming to the conclusion that this predictable OT ending was the perfect way do determine the victor.

You can’t. Even if you guaranteed both teams a possession, the advantage would be to the team who had the second possession because they would know on 4th down whether they had to go for it or if a field goal would suffice. You can never perfectly eliminate any advantage. Maybe if they gave the first possession to the home team? The home team is the higher seeded team so then it’s a reward for regular season play and not a coinflip?

If they want to change the rules that’s cool. Just seems like this is being overblown.

[thebadferret]

Winning the coin toss and receiving in OT results in a win 52.7% of the time. That isn't a large enough disparity to make it some insane advantage that needs a rule change.

That inlcudes regular season and isn't a sufficient number for the playoffs. In said playoff the statistic is a easy 10-1 for the team that won the coin toss, so yeah.

[remedy29]

Winning the coin toss and receiving in OT results in a win 52.7% of the time. That isn't a large enough disparity to make it some insane advantage that needs a rule change.

That inlcudes regular season and isn't a sufficient number for the playoffs. In said playoff the statistic is a easy 10-1 for the team that won the coin toss, so yeah.

I believe the regular season is relevant. It's NFL football after all.

And to be clear regarding the playoffs, 10-1 based solely on the coin toss. However, only 7 of 11 won the game without the other team possessing the ball. Somebody has to possess the ball first, no?!? Maybe in the playoffs, the better team wins more often than the regular season OT, which skews the numbers. Or maybe the sample size is too small.

Perhaps in the name of "fairness" fans just want to see both offenses on the field at the same time and perform some nonsense to decide the winner. How about they do the most stylist one handed 50+ yard TD reception. Would that make everyone happy??

[Pac_Eddy]

The Athletic put out two semi-serious proposals.

First would be the team that wins the coin toss picks a yard line to place the football, and the other team can choose to start on offense or defense from that point. Sudden death from that point on.

The other is blind auction. Both teams choose where on the field they'd start their offense, the team that chooses closest to their own goal line starts on offense. Sudden death from that point on.

I don't think the NFL would ever adopt either of these, just food for thought.

[qazxswedcvfrtgbnhyuj]

Winning the coin toss and receiving in OT results in a win 52.7% of the time. That isn't a large enough disparity to make it some insane advantage that needs a rule change.

That inlcudes regular season and isn't a sufficient number for the playoffs. In said playoff the statistic is a easy 10-1 for the team that won the coin toss, so yeah.

I believe the regular season is relevant. It's NFL football after all.

And to be clear regarding the playoffs, 10-1 based solely on the coin toss. However, only 7 of 11 won the game without the other team possessing the ball. Somebody has to possess the ball first, no?!? Maybe in the playoffs, the better team wins more often than the regular season OT, which skews the numbers. Or maybe the sample size is too small.

Perhaps in the name of "fairness" fans just want to see both offenses on the field at the same time and perform some nonsense to decide the winner. How about they do the most stylist one handed 50+ yard TD reception. Would that make everyone happy??

Of course. Nobody is denying that part. We'd just like it to not be decided by that part of it. Give both sides 1st and goal from the 30, one after the other, and if both score move it to the 25 etc. I really don't care, but at least try to give both teams a shot at it is all we are saying.

To say there is no better, or more fair way is just laziness imo.

And of course it's not a big deal, it's just a rule in a sporting event. Doesn't mean it's not worth discussing.

[thebadferret]

7 of 11 won the game without the other team possessing the ball

Exactly, two thirds of all teams win with the first posession. That's the problem, because there is no second posession.

Perhaps in the name of "fairness" fans just want to see both offenses on the field at the same time and perform some nonsense to decide the winner. How about they do the most stylist one handed 50+ yard TD reception. Would that make everyone happy??

Or - and I understand that this seems like a crazy idea to you - the other team gets a drive to also score a TD after the first team scores. You know? More football.

[abloom]

We can look at the other 3 major sports and clearly see that the three methods used for OT are just not great for the NFL. Baseball and basketball play extra innings/quarters where the score is evaluated after the inning/quarter ends. If tied you keep going. Hockey plays sudden death (looking only at playoffs here) and keep playing periods until someone wins. None of those options really works for football. And while the college OT rules are interesting, it drastically changes the game.

A radical idea that will eliminate ties, risk to players, overtime, and improve home field advantage: give the home team 0.5 point lead to begin the game (essentially home team wins ties). For playoff purposes this give extra advantages for performing better in the regular season. And while right now we have a 17 game season the number of home and away games should balance out from year to year and you will potentially get an 18 game season at some point.

[ThunderTung]

I feel like half the folks here are bringing arguments, and actual statistics, and the other half are just saying "that's football", "stop complaining", and "should have won it in regulation time", thereby completely disregarding the actual arguments being made for why many of us feel that adding the luck of a coin flip to a measurement of skill is ridiculous.

Can anybody that is in favor of the current rules actually bring a counter argument to the fact that you are handing one team a statistical advantage via said coin flip (and I'd assume that the 20% mentioned is a lot higher if both teams are built around their offense as was the case last night)? Do we really doubt the game would have ended the same had the Bills gotten their shot at offense first by the luck of a flip?

I had no skin in the game last night, just trying to see an argument that actually speaks for the current system. Because "shouldn't have let it get to that point" really isn't one.


((Also, since one previous poster mentioned soccer and that glorious OT game... UEFA/FIFA tried sudden death as well, at the Euros 1996. The finals were decided by the most ridiculous of dumb luck goals (and I say that as a German, who's team won becauseof said goal), and the result was hated so, so much by all fans that the idea was immediately scratched and replaced by the previous system. I wish that would happen here as well.))

How is it not? Football is a team game. Your defense needs to perform, just as your offense does. Just because in this particular game, the offenses were dominating doesnt make it "unfair". The advantage for the team that loses the coin toss, is that if your defense gets a stop, all you need is a field goal to win. It's not like BUF couldnt have made a stop, they stopped KC to a field goal starting on the 16 yard line with 2 mins left. This loss goes on BUF's coaching staff as soon as they decided that 13 seconds wasnt enough time for KC. the people upset are acting as if the NFL gave KC the ball on the 15 yard line. The teams need to play, and the defense needs to be apart of OT. This loss was completely self inflicted.

[murphysxm]

I for the life of me I can't fathom why the Bills decided to kick it through the end zone versus squib kicking at the :13 mark. They could have had a scenario where Mahomes starts at his 30-35 with :05-:06 seconds. To me that was the decision that cost the Bills the game.

[nathanq42]

Perhaps in the name of "fairness" fans just want to see both offenses on the field at the same time and perform some nonsense to decide the winner. How about they do the most stylist one handed 50+ yard TD reception. Would that make everyone happy??

Both teams line up first and goal from the 20, first one to score a TD in real time wins, you go 4 and out you receive a time penalty. If the defense gets a turn over you get a large time penalty, if the defense runs it back or pushes the offense back (like the 45 is the endzone for a safety) to the 45 game over. Defensive penalties add to your own offenses time, offensive penalties move the offense farther from the endzone

If you want to rifle through your downs to try and get a quick score but fail you incur a time penalty, you play it slow and methodical you risk being to slow and allow the other team the chance to win, turnovers would have to be very onerous to discourage constancy jump balls into the endzone.

No way it would ever happen like this, but that sounds like a fun OT system. Broadcast just puts up a split screen and the commentators can talk about strategy for time spent strategizing, and if there is something slow at one end they can focus on the other end's play.

[Prison_Mike]

Disagree.

If you can't stop a team from driving the length of the field for a TD, the loss is earned. Is there data on that the coin flip winner has a significant advantage? Is there corresponding data for college?

I think college OT is nuts. A game that goes into overtime at 3-3 can end up 34-37.

Bills played a great game. So did the Chiefs.

This.

I didn't read this entire thread so apologies if this has been discussed:

But doesn't the NFL want these overtime games to be quick so that the players aren't (further) subject to injury? I believe they've done studies on how likely injuries are to occur following an overtime game. The winner of this game has to play in the conference championship next week. Can you imagine the physical toll an additional 15(?) 20(?) 30(?) minutes of NFL football would have?...and therefore, the disadvantage it would present to that team for winning the week before? I think that disadvantage FAR outweighs the disadvantage of losing the coin toss and having a change to stop the other team from driving the length of the field.

I get that it's frustrating but I also don't think it's an easy fix, all things considered